Keynote Mette Morsing

Communica)on of CSR: The iden)ty challenge of being branded as “good”:

Me$e Morsing Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility (cbsCSR)

Copenhagen Business School

CSR Communica,on Conference Amsterdam, October 28, 2011

Isomorphic pressures for corpora;ons to not only ”do” but also explicitly ”communicate” their CSR polices, ac;ons and impacts, expecta;ons from societal actors that corpora;ons par;cipate in reparing the planet (Campbell, 2007). From implicit to explicit CSR approaches (Ma$en & Moon, 2008) Just four days ago: EU Commission’s new ”Communica)on on CSR”, October 25, 2011: A new defini;on of CSR as “the responsibility of enterprises for their impacts on society”. ”more visibility of CSR” (awards, clarifica;on, transparency, documenta;on, inclusion of public sector, etc.)

Generalized expecta;on to increase in communica;on of CSR:

Much research has inves;gated CSR communica;on in analysis of adver)sing, CSR as a marke)ng dimension (e.g. Maignan & Ferrell, 2002; Metzger, 2009), topic analysis of codes of conduct and CSR reports (e.g. Kolk, 2002), CSR accountability and transparency (e.g. Zadek et al., 2008; O’Dwyer, 2006) or social media of CSR network (e.g. Fieseler et al. 2009), CSR as dialogue (Andriof et al, 2042; Hardis, 2002), NGO ac)vism (Vestergaard, 2011; Castello & Barbera, 2011) or media men;on of CSR (Buhr & Grafström, 2006) Only li$le research has explored how communica;on of CSR (such as fx ethical codes of conduct) work to ins;tu;onalize new behaviors in organiza;ons (e.g. Academy of Management’s special issue: Corpora;ons as social change agents, 2007): how internal processes and mo;ves of organiza;onal members determine how organiza;ons shape ac;on and relate to external stakeholders (Brickson 2007, Aguilera et al 2007), and inves;ga;on of how cer;fied management standards shape socially desired firm behavior (Terlaak 2007). Communica;on of CSR signals promises and expecta;ons to organiza;onal integrity and reliability that includes the organiza;on as a whole (Christensen, Morsing & Cheney, 2006). Much instrumental research on CSR communica;on therefore centers on the no;on of consistency (e.g., MacIntosh, 2007; Ihlen, Bartle$ and May, 2011). But it is an open ques;on if CSR the gap between words and ac;on will ever be closed? Will a company ever by 10% socially responsible? Research on accountability, transparency and corporate communica;on assumes (implicitly) that words and ac;ons must be consistent for the CSR message to be trustworthy. Cri;cal management research ques;ons and inves;gates to what extent corporate messages about CSR are a true reflec;on of reality? Are organiza;ons living up to their own words? Communica;on scholars have argued that CSR is about aspira;onal talk (Christensen et al. 2010) and that ins;tu;onaliza;on of communica;on of CSR will increase gap between words and ac;on. However, such gap may be produc;ve. A devoid of gaps may mean iner;a and rigidity and be counterproduc;ve for organiza;onal flexibility and innova;on within the area of social and environmental responsibility.

Communica;on of CSR: An interdisciplinary exercise


Communica;on of CSR

Public rela;ons

Corporate communica;on

Media and culture studies

Iden;ty

Marke;ng and corporate branding theory

Poli;cal communica;on

THEMES: Company-‐stakeholder dialogue Reuta;on NGO Ac;vism Democray Transparency Accountability CSR reports Codes of conduct Media Adver;sing … … INSTRUMENTAL RESEARCH AND INTERPRETIVE RESEARCH


Communica;on of CSR

Public rela;ons

Corporate communica;on

Media and culture studies

Iden;ty Marke;ng and corporate

branding theory

Communica;on studies

Poli;cal communica;on

THEMES: Company-‐stakeholder dialogue Reuta;on NGO Ac;vism Democray Transparency Accountability CSR reports Codes of conduct Media Adver;sing … … * INSTRUMENTAL RESEARCH * INTERPRETIVE RESEARCH * CRITICAL MANAGEMENT STUDIES

Research implicitly seems to assume that corporate communica,on of CSR is seamlessly desired, integrated and adopted into organiza,onal prac,ce by members. Managers tend to agree: ”CSR is part of or DNA” However, maybe communica;on of CSR is not always be welcomed that easily …

Posi;ve iden;fica;on is taken for granted by communica;on research and management:

1) Employees are – willingly or unwillingly – central part of the communica)on of CSR, of the corporate brand promise of CSR (Hatch & Schultz, 2009)

2) Organisa;onal members are probably the most engaged stakeholder of the corporate communica;on of CSR (Christensen & Cheney, 2001)

3) Iden)ty decides the ways in which organiza)ons engage in social ac)on, and relate to external stakeholders (Brickson, 1997) 4) Employees may be seen as a new ”public” (e.g. public rela;ons) in the corporate communica;on of CSR. Employees become a ”public” because they are cons;tuted as the corporate brand on CSR. This is accentuated by social media, where employees are invited to discuss social issues, but par;cipate as ”themselves” but speak in accordance with the corporate CSR policy.

Why is iden;ty important for understanding the corporate project of communica;ng CSR

”Damned if we do. Damned if we don’t.” Anita Roddick on CSR communica3on in Body Shop’s first non-‐financial report 1995, p.5

Whose iden;ty is displayed in corporate brand promises of CSR?

•  Employing more than 5,000 people. •  Los Angeles manufacturing facili;es. •  Paying workers 12 USD an hour (minimum wage: 6,75 USD)

Sender The ideal

corporate ”we”

Receiver The ideal

corporate ”we”

Message 1: Adver)sement

Code 1: Sales or

Posi;oning rhetoric

Message 1: Adver)sement

Code 2: Organiza;onal Self-‐percep;on

Displacement of Context

Message 2: Community, Belonging

Iden)fica)on

Figure 1: Adver;sing as Auto-‐communica;on (Christensen, 1997:208)

Theore;cal frame Communica;on of CSR in the perspec;ve of auto-‐communica;on

To what extent is communica;on of CSR a communica;on dept. task?

Board

R&D

Logis;cs

Finance Marke;ng/Communica;on

CEO

... and to what extent is communica;on of CSR an organiza;onal task?

Board

R&D

Logis;cs

Finance Marke;ng/Communica;on

CEO

Expecta)ons about a )ght coupling between words and deeds That companies do what they say

An expecta)on about authen)city

That the company not only does but also believes in what it says Most oPen an expecta)on of moral commitment to responsibility

That CSR implies an ethical responsibility Expeca)ons about a longterm commitment

That the company does not withdraw its CSR promise

So, what’s so special about communica;on of CSR? Why does communica;on of CSR involve employees?

Framework towards understanding how communica;on influences iden;ty:

Member percep;ons of communica;on of CSR

Iden;fica;on Cynical distance

Self-‐absorp;on Resistance

POSITIVE PERCEPTIONS NEGATIVE PERCEPTIONS

CORPORATE SUPPORT CORPORATE RISK





Framework towards understanding how communica;on influences iden;ty:

Member percep;ons of communica;on of CSR

Iden;fica;on Characteris)c: Personal dedica;on and self-‐gra;fica;on by par;cipa;ng in the company’s statements about contribu;ons to solve the world’s social and environmental problems Research ques)on: when does iden)fica)on occur? Contextualiza;on of posi;ve iden;fica;on with communica;on of CSR? (Elsbach & Kramer, Du$on & Dukerich). Leadership? Culture? Values? Or perhaps communica;on itself?



Iden;fica;on Observa,ons: “Sustainable living is about improving society, even though we also gain from it in a business economic sense. I am proud of that. I am pleased that VELUX works with Sustainable Living – that I work for a company with a sustainability strategy. But I also expect my workplace to do so. Otherwise I would not want to work here”. (VEPO)) “It means something very personal for me that I work in a company that ac,vely pursues to improve social and environmental problems at a global scale. Novo Nordisk has been a frontrunner on sustainability issues and con,nuously sets high goals for itself. I am proud of being part of it and I am proud of telling my family about it” (NNOK) “I think it is mo,va,ng to know that we build factories that make a difference for people all over the world. Even though our part is just a ,ny step and even though it might be a liZle far-‐fetched to state that we are saving the world, you feel that you are doing something important which is reflected in the brand.” [SBDT] “We are a large mul,na,onal player with global influence, and we must contribute to a more sustainable world. For me working in company that takes steps to improving labor condi,ons in for example Asia is very important. Okay, we are not perfect. But we dare to do take ac,on and to serve as a role model by also pu`ng demands on our suppliers. In this way, XXX helps to spread rings in the water for a beZer world”. (IKOK)



Iden;fica;on Characteris)c: Personal dedica;on and self-‐gra;fica;on by par;cipa;ng in the company’s statements about contribu;ons to solve the world’s social and environmental problems Research ques)on: when does iden)fica)on occur? Contextualiza;on of posi;ve iden;fica;on with communica;on of CSR? (Elsbach & Kramer, Du$on & Dukerich). Leadership? Culture? Values? Or perhaps communica;on itself?



Self-‐absorp;on

Characteris)c: Strong sense of self, autonomous sense-‐making: ”we are doing the right thing”, self-‐confidence of the corporate engagement in social and environmental issues, narcissism Research ques)on: ? What lead employees to not listening to cri;que? Self-‐closure and communica;on as ritual (Christensen, 1997), defense strategies and denial of cri;que as communica;on rou;nes (Cornelissen, 2010



Self-‐absorp;on Observa;ons: Percep3ons of managerial self-‐absorp3on: ”Management is invited to conferences and presenta,ons talking about all the good deeds we do. They love hearing themselves talk about CSR. But it most of all seems like they are celebra,ng themselves – forge`ng the serious cause about poor peopel and climate change we are actually doing this for” (VEXA) “We have had our focus on an external audience and have treated our internal colleagues as a stepchild. Informa,on is oben available on the intranet, but it is just a copy of the external messages -‐ it is not wriZen to me as an employee. That means, why do we par,cipate in the different events? For example, we decided to be part of COP 15 – what was our strategy for doing that? It is all about making demonstra,on houses and talking to poli,cians, while ge`ng employees on board … who cares?” (Employee, VEMU) Percep3ons of marke3ng dept. self-‐absorp3on: “When I had to present this, I believe I said: This is then our Marke,ng Department who believes that we need to be presented as something new and fancy – something like that – and then we laughed about it and we did not talk about it again. “ [CCSJ] GeFng absorbed in poten3ally peripheral or disconnected CSR: X Coffee company engaging in animal welfare due to the owner-‐manager’s personal preferences Not listening to stakeholder concerns and sugges3ons: Nestlé-‐GreenPeace



Self-‐absorp;on

Characteris)c: Strong sense of self, autonomous sense-‐making: ”we are doing the right thing”, self-‐confidence of the corporate engagement in social and environmental issues, narcissism Research ques)on: ? What lead employees to not listening to cri;que? Self-‐closure and communica;on as ritual (Christensen, 1997), defense strategies and denial of cri;que as communica;on rou;nes (Cornelissen, 2010



Cynical distance* Characteris)c: Employees distancing themselves from the corporate promise of CSR, yet obedient by passively conforming. Silent (dormant) disagreement. ”I dont want to do it, but I know I have to do it”. The pressure to perform CSR. Research ques)on: ? How do impulses to openly resist become neutralized? Why do employees not ac;vely sabotage or protest their disagreement? (Spicer & Fleming). What societal processes of ins;tu;onaliza;on re-‐inforce cynical distance to communica;on of CSR? Source of concept: Spicer & Fleming



Cynical distance Observa;ons: ”So we just try to work around it. Nobody really talks about [the CSR tagline] … Maybe it is this taglin,e that is a bit American and too different from what one would have done in Denmark. Not that it is wrong – I don’t know what works out there in the world. I am not a marke,ng person, so if it works it is ok. But I do understand the people, who think that it is over the top. It is not Danish mentality.” [CQ] [I am] a bit skep,cal [towards the brand] because we would like to contribute to improve things in society, but we are more than 700 employees in Denmark and a lot of what we do is good robust engineering work and not necessarily this high-‐fly kind of thing. So [the brand] easily sounds like very grand and high in the sky-‐like – ”Engineering for a healthier world” it brings out tears in your eyes [laughing]” [JARN] ” […] Right when we had those new templates and the front page with the globe – what did we need that for – and the tagline and all that. I actually thought it was embarrassing to come to those customer mee,ngs. [...] When I sat there opposite the customer and had to present it [the company] with that front page – I quickly turned the page away from it […]. Now I am more used to it. [CCSJ]



Cynical distance* Characteris)c: Employees distancing themselves from the corporate promise of CSR, yet obedient by passively conforming. Silent (dormant) disagreement. ”I dont want to do it, but I know I have to do it”. The pressure to perform CSR. Research ques)on: ? How do impulses to openly resist become neutralized? Why do employees not ac;vely sabotage or protest their disagreement? (Spicer & Fleming). What societal processes of ins;tu;onaliza;on re-‐inforce cynical distance to communica;on of CSR? Source of concept: Spicer & Fleming



Resistance Characteris)c: CSR is perceived as ”implicit”, employees opposing that the values and ”authen;city” of CSR is being supplanted by commercial interests: ”CSR is part of our cultural heritage, it is NOT a branding exercise”. Refusal to par;cipate, engage in CSR but only in own area of exper;se. Percep;ons of corporate over-‐promising, or CSR fa;gues. Research ques)on: ? How does explicit communica;on of CSR contribute to employee resistance? In what ways does resistance to a socially desirable act (CSR) transform into a perceived iden;ty threat?



Resistance Observa;ons: ”I think this is very important for companies to take part in CSR. And I think it is very important for XX to be socially responsible. In fact, this is ingrained in our heritage. But the recent approach to be ”Thought Leader in Sustainable Living” … I simply fail to see how that has anything to do with our CSR values, and I am not the one engaging myself in this project” (VEME) ”Well, we are si`ng here as ordinary engineers, doing our work and then some fancy marke,ng agency from the expensive neighborhoods of Copenhagen comes along – actually, I dont know where they are form, but it feels that way – and suddenly there is this big bubble of ”doing right” around you” (MHOU) “I have absolutely no idea. I don’t use it myself – and I am not going to use it. It would seem completely wrong on the occasions where I talk to customers. […] Pain,ng an icon of our company is too big a step. It is easier for me to look the customer in the eyes and build trust from the liZle things we do instead of this thing about crea,ng a beZer world. […] I am not ready at all to take up that discussion.” [KIMT]



Resistance Characteris)c: CSR is perceived as ”implicit”, employees opposing that the values and ”authen;city” of CSR is being supplanted by commercial interests: ”CSR is part of our cultural heritage, it is NOT a branding exercise”. Refusal to par;cipate, engage in CSR but only in own area of exper;se. Percep;ons of corporate over-‐promising, or CSR fa;gues. Research ques)on: ? How does explicit communica;on of CSR contribute to employee resistance? In what ways does resistance to a socially desirable act (CSR) transform into a perceived iden;ty threat?



A non-‐desirable scenario: Member percep;ons of communica;on of CSR





So, can we learn something about stakeholder rela;ons from inves;ga;ng how iden;ty is influenced by communica;on of CSR and trying to understand the most dedicated ”public”’s commitment and hesita;ons? I think so …

Communica;on influences iden;ty: consumer rela;ons to corpora;on communica;on of CSR

Iden;fica;on THE FAN

Cynical distance THE APATHETIC CONSUMER

Self-‐absorp;on THE NARCISSISTIC

CONSUMER

Resistance THE SKEPTICAL CONSUMER



Summing up: Communica;on of CSR as a posi;ve iden;fier as well as an iden;ty threat Communica;on of CSR as a powerful source of cultural engineering of employees’ selves On the one hand, communica;on of CSR serves to enhance member iden;fica;on with the corporate brand, to increase member loyalty, commitment, dedica;on and self-‐gra;fica;on, … On the other hand, communica;on of CSR also func;ons ambiguously as a compelling and powerful narra;ve for employees while simultaneously cap;va;ng organiza;onal iden;ty as a form of iden;ty threat in which increased pressure to perform is enacted, cri;cism is pacified and local iden;fica;on with the CSR message is discouraged.

CONCLUDING NOTE: Ques;ons for research 1) How not only socially undesirable but also socially desirable features a$ached to a corporate image threaten the organiza;onal self-‐concept of its members 2) Resistance not only “becomes an integra;ve mechanism reinforcing the domina;on” (Spicer and Fleming) but rather reintroduces the domina;on upon the individual member to passively subjugate him or herself and accept the domina;on of a publicly perceived desirable corporate brand feature 3) Therefore, challenges the no;on of CSR being a voluntary ac;vity for organiza;onal members, as we argue that employees are cap;vated and pacified to reproduce Managerial visions of CSR in uncri;cal ways -‐ by the corporate brand promise of CSR 4) Such resistance is likely to be accentuated when employees become part of the corporate brand messages in social media where they are encouraged to personally engage with external audiences but remain with the communicated frame of corporate CSR policies and ac;vi;es.

Thank you Me$e Morsing Copenhagen Business School [email protected]

Keynote Mette Morsing

Business

Transcript of Keynote Mette Morsing